The real reason balisongs were banned?

K

Knife_Collector_101

Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
255
What is the real reason why butterfly knives, or balisongs, became subject to so many bans and restrictions around the world?

I ask this question because it’s one of those things people seem to acknowledge but everybody has a different answer to why some governments decided to bring the prohibition hammer down on them.

The most common thing people will tell you is this:

1.) They were banned because so many people were playing with them and injuring themselves.

I’ve tried to look for some kind of official documentation of this claim and I can’t seem to find it anywhere. I’m starting to think it’s a myth.

For example, some have said the reason they were banned in Canada is because the injuries and emergency room visits piled up so much it was putting a financial strain on their healthcare system and since Canada has universal healthcare with the government footing the bills, they didn’t want to have to keep paying for people’ accidents so they banned them. I call BS on this for a number of reasons.

1. Balisongs are legal in European countries like Austria, Poland, Czech Republic, and Hungary and those places all have universal healthcare.

2. While it’s possible to cut yourself while practicing tricks with a balisong, the idea of there being such an extraordinarily high number of accidents requiring surgery, stitching, etc. that it swamps a country’s healthcare system I find to be EXTREMELY unlikely. Balisongs were always popular among niche groups, but they were never some popular toy like Lawn Darts, Clackers, and Kinder Eggs which caused actual deaths.

3. Look at the number of accidents people have with daily household items like can openers, kitchen knives, garbage disposals, hedge trimmers, lawnmowers, or accidents with sports like skateboarding and bicycling. I’m willing to venture those numbers are way higher than accidents people have had with balisongs and none of those things were ever banned.

So no, this idea that too many people were cutting themselves is something that doesn’t hold water. This isn’t even a problem today since trainers exist.

What seems more likely, is this:

2.) They were banned because of their intimidation factor with the flashy openings and tricks and the fact that they were seen in a lot of movies being wielded by bad guys. In other words, it was the same deal with switchblades. They simply got a bad reputation, some dumb politicians got scared by them and people thought of them of as dangerous “thug knives.” That seems WAY more likely.

In addition to this, it’s possible that racism was a likely factor in driving the bans. Think about it, it’s a knife from an Asian country (Philippines), it has an Asian sounding name like “Balisong” and it has heavy roots in Asian culture. No doubt that the xenophobia which was a reason for places banning other Asian weapons like nunchucks, throwing stars, etc. played a role.

Interested in hearing any thoughts you guys might have.
 
Last edited:
"In addition to this, it’s possible that racism was a likely factor in driving the bans. Think about it, it’s a knife from an Asian country (Philippines), it has an Asian sounding name like “Balisong” and it has heavy roots in Asian culture. No doubt that the xenophobia which was a reason for places banning other Asian weapons like nunchucks, throwing stars, etc. played a role."

This is very unlikely. No weapons get banned due to racism. If anything it may add to their popularity.
The intimidation factor is the likely reason. You see it with anti-gun laws and other knee-jerk responses to perceived "dangerous" objects.
 
Danke42 said:
They're banned for the same reason as switchblades. If kids get one they run out and join a violence gang.

Thus parents and educators are happy as there are no more gangs and politicians can bask in the warmth of a job well done.
Click to expand...
Exactly! A bunch of paranoid folks getting worked up over something that looked scary to them so they go running to legislators who are looking for votes to make it go away so they can sleep easier at night. It’s the same old song and dance.
 
I sure want to hope that racism didn't play into any decision made by the morons who decided to ban them. Let's hope that it was just massive ignorance on their part; and call it a day.
For the record: I have no dog in this fight. I am such a ham-fisted klutz that I couldn't even open one of them up!
 
Why is GTA flamed?

Same reason; people (especially politicians, influencers, etc) like to find something easy to blame and easy to get sympathy for in order to lobby a cause.

So yes, its Hollywood's fault in a way lol.
 
I find it interesting that even in the UK, arguably one of the most restrictive knife societies on the planet, buying a Fairbairn Sykes is absolutely fine but G-d help you if customs find a 3" automatic in your suitcase!🙄
Politicians don't know sh*t from Shinola.

As for Balisongs.........I blame Jeff Imada and all those cool 80's movies he was in! 🤣
 
Things are easy to ban; you can easily build a majority to ban anything. 40 years ago we even stupid enough to ban mental health institutions. So now the crazies are living in cardboard boxes, defalcating in our the streets or running around killing people. But the deviants are happy that there is no longer anyone around to call them "mentally ill". The powers that be want to keep going until the serfs are reduced to bread and water in a communal hovel. Eventually, we may ban indiscriminate breathing and require a license to breath.

n2s
 
not2sharp said:
Things are easy to ban; you can easily build a majority to ban anything. 40 years ago we even stupid enough to ban mental health institutions. So now the crazies are living in cardboard boxes, defalcating in our the streets or running around killing people. But the deviants are happy that there is no longer anyone around to call them "mentally ill". The powers that be want to keep going until the serfs are reduced to bread and water in a communal hovel. Eventually, we may ban indiscriminate breathing and require a license to breath.

n2s
Click to expand...
Mouth-breathers should definitely be banned🤪
 
Having read a lot of knife laws across the 50 states (which is partially documented on my site), it's not so clear cut.

The first thing to mention is that they are not actually banned in most places. It's just more of a popular rumor among people that don't actually read statutes or case law. They're legal in my state of Maryland for example. Ironically, I dislike them and so I no longer own any.

The second thing is that they're rarely ever referred to by name in legislation. I cannot think of a single time in a US-based law they are referred to as a "balisong" and the term "butterfly knife" while it occurs, is fairly uncommon. Most laws about them use some phrasing similar to 15 U.S.C. §1241 which is "opens automatically by operation of inertia, gravity, or both." Many use the term "centrifugal force." Canada's law also uses these terms. This descriptive phrasing hints that many of these laws were not originally intended to apply to balisongs, but actually were meant to ban true gravity knives. That is, knives that can literally fall open under the force of gravity when the release is pressed. The aforementioned federal law has never even been firmly established as applying to balisongs, as there are far, far more of them coming into the US or being sold over state lines that autos ever were. Many of these laws have been in place long before balisongs started becoming popular in the US or appearing in films.

Why gravity knife bans? Like switchblades, they were perceived by the ignorant as being able to open "quickly" with one hand, yet still be "more concealable" then a fixed blade knife. Such ideas were not isolated to politicians, as police officers would often give testimony to this effect (there are records of them doing so for switchblades and ballistic knives) and during these eras we tended to take them at their word without considerations for why they might be biased. I have also heard the theory that the types of gravity knives during these eras were predominately perceived as German weapons, just as switchblades were perceived as Italian, and both of these were enemy nations during WWII that occurred right before the bans.

Most balisong "bans," where they actually exist, appear to be reinterpretations of these older gravity knife statutes. Case law goes both ways depending on the jurisdiction, and these cases are often caused by an arrest that goes to trial. Typically these cases involve a police officer catching someone with a balisong who that officer dislikes for some reason and so they attempt to stretch the law to suit their agenda, such as what happened in Thompson v Commonweath, 2009. Under oath, the arresting officer attempted to claim the balisong was uniquely dangerous because a) they can be operated with one hand (stupid because fixed blades and thumb-stud knives also can be) and b) because he allegedly retrieved them from gang members all the time (guilt by association rather than proof of danger, assuming he wasn't just lying). Thankfully, the Supreme Court of Virginia didn't buy it and ruled balisongs are not illegal to carry.
 
glistam said:
Having read a lot of knife laws across the 50 states (which is partially documented on my site), it's not so clear cut.

The first thing to mention is that they are not actually banned in most places. It's just more of a popular rumor among people that don't actually read statutes or case law. They're legal in my state of Maryland for example. Ironically, I dislike them and so I no longer own any.

The second thing is that they're rarely ever referred to by name in legislation. I cannot think of a single time in a US-based law they are referred to as a "balisong" and the term "butterfly knife" while it occurs, is fairly uncommon. Most laws about them use some phrasing similar to 15 U.S.C. §1241 which is "opens automatically by operation of inertia, gravity, or both." Many use the term "centrifugal force." Canada's law also uses these terms. This descriptive phrasing hints that many of these laws were not originally intended to apply to balisongs, but actually were meant to ban true gravity knives. That is, knives that can literally fall open under the force of gravity when the release is pressed. The aforementioned federal law has never even been firmly established as applying to balisongs, as there are far, far more of them coming into the US or being sold over state lines that autos ever were. Many of these laws have been in place long before balisongs started becoming popular in the US or appearing in films.

Why gravity knife bans? Like switchblades, they were perceived by the ignorant as being able to open "quickly" with one hand, yet still be "more concealable" then a fixed blade knife. Such ideas were not isolated to politicians, as police officers would often give testimony to this effect (there are records of them doing so for switchblades and ballistic knives) and during these eras we tended to take them at their word without considerations for why they might be biased. I have also heard the theory that the types of gravity knives during these eras were predominately perceived as German weapons, just as switchblades were perceived as Italian, and both of these were enemy nations during WWII that occurred right before the bans.

Most balisong "bans," where they actually exist, appear to be reinterpretations of these older gravity knife statutes. Case law goes both ways depending on the jurisdiction, and these cases are often caused by an arrest that goes to trial. Typically these cases involve a police officer catching someone with a balisong who that officer dislikes for some reason and so they attempt to stretch the law to suit their agenda, such as what happened in Thompson v Commonweath, 2009. Under oath, the arresting officer attempted to claim the balisong was uniquely dangerous because a) they can be operated with one hand (stupid because fixed blades and thumb-stud knives also can be) and b) because he allegedly retrieved them from gang members all the time (guilt by association rather than proof of danger, assuming he wasn't just lying). Thankfully, the Supreme Court of Virginia didn't buy it and ruled balisongs are not illegal to carry.
Click to expand...
Thanks as always for your input, glistam! You’re always able to cut through all the Internet noise and bullpucky with genuine researched facts.

Yeah, one thing I have noticed is that they aren’t as widely banned in the states as many have made them out to be. The problem is the internet is filled with so much rumor, hearsay, misinformation, misinterpretations, and things that turn out to be urban legends that the vast majority of people simply don’t know what they’re talking about and have incorrect presumptions about things.

The only state where there’s a ban with the term “butterfly knife” written in the statutory law is Hawaii (the constitutionality of that ban is currently being challenged in court).
 
So glistam, in your opinion, can we safely say this whole “they were banned because people kept cutting themselves while playing with them” thing is just an old wives’ tale?
 
I'll ad my 2 cents, FWIW.

Hollywood definitely played a role, not only in getting balisongs banned, but also switchblades, nunchaku, and shuriken "throwing stars."

Notice how bans against them took effect shortly after they gained prominence or wider exposure, in movies?
Switchblades: Blackboard Jungle, Rebel Without A Cause, etc.
Nunchaku: Enter The Dragon, etc,
Throwing stars: The various American-made ninja movies of the '80s.
Balisongs: Early '80s American movies with balisongs, such as The Big Brawl, Sharkey's Machine, etc., etc.

Throwing stars were forbidden from being mail-ordered because Karate fighter Larry Kelley, who worked for the USPS in the '80s, said he noticed people were ordering throwing stars through the mail, felt they were a threat to America's youth, and successfully lobbied before Ted Kennedy to get them banned from being mail-ordered.


Jim
 
Last edited:
Knife_Collector_101 said:
So glistam, in your opinion, can we safely say this whole “they were banned because people kept cutting themselves while playing with them” thing is just an old wives’ tale?
Click to expand...
Yep, I've not seen any evidence to support this. Generally bill text when a law goes before the legislature explains the rationale for a law being passed, and I have yet to see this mentioned. As per usual, I am open to being proven wrong, but to do so, someone would have to provide an actual copy of a bill with headers and attributions, not "I heard somewhere."

I will say that the reasons they do provide in bill text for weapon laws tend to be idiotic, unsupported by concrete evidence or outright dishonest. For example, there are great many are definitely racist/classist, but they won't say that. But if they could use accidental self-injury as a reason in a bill, they surely would include it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top